Latest news with #ClaytonAct
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
FTC May Free VanLoh's Quantum in Marcellus Over EQT-Tug Hill Deal
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) may continue clearing its gulag, now looking to free Wil VanLoh's Quantum Capital Group over a $5.2 billion deal with EQT Corp. in 2023. The 2023 order prohibits private investor Quantum, founded by VanLoh, from holding an EQT board seat and required Quantum to divest its EQT shares. It also prohibits Quantum from holding a seat on the top seven Appalachian gas producers' boards without FTC permission. The M&A deal involved was EQT's acquisition of Quantum-backed, No. 11 Marcellus producer Tug Hill and its midstream unit XcL Midstream. The FTC is reopening public comment on the case on whether to cancel the restrictions. 'The FTC's 2023 consent order resolved antitrust concerns that alleged the deal would have made Quantum one of EQT's largest shareholders and given Quantum a seat on EQT's board of directors,' the FTC reported July 22. Among Quantum's current Appalachian investments is HG Energy, which Quantum and other investors, including Elliott Investment Management, bought out of an expiring Quantum fund and put into a 'continuation fund' to hold onto the property until ripe for exit. The five-seat FTC consists now of three members, all Republican. President Biden-named chair Lina Khan resigned in January and President Trump fired the two other Democrats holding seats. Recently, the new FTC revoked three past orders involving U.S. oil and gas producers. In one, EnCap Investments and its portfolio companies are required now to give the FTC only a heads up if wanting to do a deal in the Uinta Basin, rather than require prior approval. In two others, Permian Basin veteran Scott Sheffield was allowed to join the Exxon Mobil board after all and Hess Corp. chief John Hess was allowed to join the Chevron Corp. board. Invoking the Clayton Act The FTC's 2023 decision was also reportedly made over concern of an existing joint venture between Quantum and EQT in the Appalachian Basin. 'The FTC alleged that an existing joint venture between EQT and Quantum involved in purchasing mineral rights in the Appalachian Basin raised concerns regarding anticompetitive information exchange and the harm to competition in the acquisition of mineral rights,' the FTC said July 22 about the Quantum-EQT deal. Quantum is currently prohibited from holding an EQT seat 'to prevent the formation of an interlocking directorate, which is an arrangement that occurs when an officer or director of one firm simultaneously serves as an officer or director of a competing firm,' the FTC wrote in summary of the decision that it is considering canceling. 'The final order also required Quantum to divest its EQT shares, prevented anticompetitive information exchange, unwound the joint venture between the two entities and imposed additional restraints to protect competition.' The commission said in 2023 that it was its first case in 40 years that enforced Section 8 of the Clayton Act, which is aimed at prohibiting interlocking directorates—when an officer or director of one firm simultaneously serves as an officer or director of a competing firm. Nathan Soderstrom, acting deputy director of the FTC's Bureau of Competition at the time, said, 'As originally structured, this deal would have resulted in an illegal interlocking directorate, facilitated the exchange of confidential and competitively sensitive information and otherwise stifled competition in the Appalachian Basin.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Business Insider
6 days ago
- Business
- Business Insider
FTC reopens, sets aside Exxon-Pioneer final order
The Federal Trade Commission reopened and set aside the final consent order involving Exxon Mobil Corporation's (XOM) proposed acquisition of Pioneer Natural Resources Company (PXD). The FTC's final order prohibited Exxon from nominating, designating, or appointing founder and former Pioneer CEO Scott Sheffield to Exxon's board of directors or from serving in an advisory capacity in any way to the Exxon board or Exxon's management. In addition, the final consent order required that for a period of five years, Exxon shall not nominate, designate, or appoint any Pioneer employee or director, other than certain named individuals, to Exxon's board. The FTC's May 2024 complaint alleged that Mr. Sheffield sought to coordinate oil output levels with other crude oil producers, and that appointment to Exxon's board would give him a larger platform for coordination and create an unlawful interlocking directorate. Now-Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson and Commissioner Melissa Holyoak dissented when the consent order was proposed. In January 2025, just days before President Trump's inauguration, the outgoing majority approved the final consent order, again over the dissent of now-Chairman Ferguson and Commissioner Holyoak. In March 2025, Mr. Sheffield petitioned the FTC to reopen and vacate the order, and the FTC received over 3,000 comments from the public. Upon review of the matter, the FTC found that the complaint: failed to plead any antitrust law violation under Section 7 of the Clayton Act; contained no allegations that Exxon's acquisition of Pioneer would be anticompetitive; did not allege that the acquisition would materially increase market concentration or that it would increase the potential for coordination among oil producers, and; disregarded the FTC's Merger Guidelines and decades of precedent. The FTC denied Mr. Sheffield's petition because he lacked standing. However, the FTC Act authorizes the Commission to modify a prior order when it is in the public interest. In light of the complaint's deficiencies, the FTC concluded that maintaining the restrictions on Mr. Sheffield's employment would damage the FTC's credibility and undermine its mission. Vacating the final order is therefore in the public interest. Exxon has already consented to setting aside the final order and has waived all its rights under rule 3.72(b). Thursday's decision accordingly sets aside the final order without further process. The vote to reopen and set aside the final order was 3-0. Elevate Your Investing Strategy:
Business Insider
6 days ago
- Business
- Business Insider
FTC reopens, sets aside Chevron-Hess final order
The Federal Trade Commission reopened and set aside the final consent order involving Chevron Corporation's (CVX) proposed acquisition of Hess Corporation (HES). The January 2025 final consent order prohibited Chevron from nominating, designating, or appointing Hess CEO John B. Hess Chevron's board of directors. The FTC's complaint alleged that Mr. Hess made 'supportive messaging' to representatives of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries regarding their agenda to stabilize the oil market. The complaint alleged that Mr. Hess's participation on Chevron's board would amplify Mr. Hess's messaging to OPEC and others, increasing the likelihood that Chevron would align its production with OPEC's output decisions. When the settlement was published in September 2024, now-Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson and Commissioner Melissa Holyoak dissented. However, just days before President Trump's inauguration, the outgoing majority approved the final consent order, again over the dissent of now-Chairman Ferguson and Commissioner Holyoak. In March 2025, Chevron and Hess petitioned the Commission to reopen and modify the final consent order. After a period of public comment and review, the FTC found that the complaint: failed to plead any antitrust law violation under Section 7 of the Clayton Act; contained no allegations that Chevron's acquisition of Hess would be anticompetitive; did not allege that the acquisition would materially increase market concentration or that it would increase the potential for coordination among oil producers, and; disregarded the FTC's Merger Guidelines and decades of precedent. The FTC concluded that in light of these deficiencies, maintaining the restrictions on Mr. Hess's employment would damage the FTC's credibility and undermine its mission. Granting Chevron's and Hess's petition is therefore in the public interest. The vote approving the petition to reopen and set aside the order was 3-0. Elevate Your Investing Strategy:
Wall Street Journal
11-07-2025
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Josh Hawley Doesn't Know What a Monopoly Is
Antitrust laws such as the 1890 Sherman Act and the 1914 Clayton Act have a clear purpose, according to the Justice Department: They 'prohibit anticompetitive conduct and mergers that deprive American consumers, taxpayers, and workers of the benefits of competition.' This means that domination of the market for a particular product or service by one or a handful of firms should be of no particular concern to the government. Only when a business dominates because of anticompetitive practices, or uses its power to prevent competitors from emerging, should the government get involved.
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
VoIP-Pal Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Google, Apple, and Samsung
Chairman and CEO Emil Malak Affirms Commitment to Antitrust Path Forward, Citing Alleged Market Exclusion and Suppression of Standalone Wi-Fi Calling Newly published article on CEOCFO Magazine WACO, Texas, June 12, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Inc. (OTCQB: VPLM), announces the filing of a new federal antitrust lawsuit against Google, Apple, and Samsung. The complaint also names AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile as co-conspirators in what VoIP-Pal alleges is a coordinated effort to suppress lawful competition in standalone Wi-Fi Calling. This marks the company's third significant legal action addressing what it contends is a long-standing structure of exclusion and control over mobile voice infrastructure. In a message to shareholders, Chairman and CEO Emil Malak issued the following statement: 'Today, I write to you not just as the Chairman and CEO of VoIP-Pal, but as a fellow believer in justice, perseverance, and the power of innovation to overcome even the most entrenched opposition. We have now filed a third significant antitrust complaint—this time against Google, Apple, and Samsung. In addition, we have named AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile as co-conspirators in what we allege is a coordinated effort to suppress Standalone Wi-Fi Calling—the central breach underlying all three of our complaints. Let me be clear: this is no longer just about patents. It is about structural exclusion, denial of access, and the suppression of lawful competition.' Mr. Malak reaffirmed VoIP-Pal's legal shift from patent enforcement to broader statutory actions under the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, Telecommunications Act of 1996, and civil RICO statute. He noted the company's longstanding role in developing patented routing and Wi-Fi Calling infrastructure, and stated that dominant gatekeepers have allegedly blocked fair market access to the technologies VoIP-Pal pioneered. 'We are no longer merely asserting patent rights,' Malak continued. 'We are challenging what we believe is the abuse of market dominance and exclusion of competition. Since 2005, VoIP-Pal has developed and validated key technologies intended to empower consumers to access affordable, independent voice services over Wi-Fi. According to our complaint, we have been locked out of the infrastructure and denied integration.' VoIP-Pal's class action complaint seeks to represent approximately 373 million U.S. mobile subscribers whom it alleges were harmed by exclusionary practices that prevent access to non-carrier Wi-Fi-based calling. The company contends that consumers have been systematically denied alternatives to bundled carrier plans, despite the availability of widespread Wi-Fi connectivity. 'We face overwhelming opposition,' Malak said, 'but we believe the law and the facts are on our side.' VoIP-Pal believes that the allegations raised in its filings warrant close examination by federal and state regulators, including Attorneys General, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Trade Commission. 'VoIP-Pal believes that federal and state regulators may find cause to examine the systemic barriers described in our filings and encourages careful review of the allegations.' Malak concluded: 'We remain open to constructive engagement with all parties. While we are fully prepared to litigate these claims through trial if necessary, we will always consider resolution paths that uphold the integrity of our innovations and ensure fair competition. Until such opportunities arise, we will continue to advance this case with confidence and resolve.' An article detailing the newly filed antitrust complaint was published by . Read the full article here. About Inc. ('VoIP-Pal') is a publicly traded corporation (OTCQB: VPLM) headquartered in Waco, TX. The company owns a portfolio of patents related to Voice-over-Internet Protocol ('VoIP') technology that it is actively seeking to monetize. Forward-Looking StatementsThis press release contains forward-looking statements as defined under securities laws. These statements reflect management's current expectations and are inherently uncertain. Litigation outcomes and settlement discussions are unpredictable, and there is no assurance of favorable resolution. For Further InformationCorporate Website: Inquiries: IR@ Contact: Rich Inza, (954) 495-4600Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
